By Steven Elbow
The Capital Times
MADISON, Wis. — In 1979, after several judges came under fire for corruption, Wisconsin banned bail bondsmen from practicing in the state.
Now Republicans want to bring the practice back.
In Tuesday’s all-night budget session, the Republican-controlled Joint Finance Committee included a provision that lets defendants pay 10 percent of their bonds to middlemen instead of paying the full amount to the courts. Initially at least, the practice would be restricted to five counties — Dane, Milwaukee, Waukesha, Racine and Kenosha — for a five-year pilot program.
Bail bonding companies, which would be on the hook for the bonds, would be authorized to dispatch “bail recovery agents” to track down defendants if they failed to show up in court.
“I’m afraid this will be a significant reduction in the quality of safety in the community as these ‘Dog’ the bounty hunters are running the streets trying to track down people who are jumping bail,” says Dane County Sheriff Dave Mahoney, referring to the macho reality television star.
It will also hurt victims services programs, which are funded in part by a percentage of bail paid by defendants, which would get pocketed by the bail bond companies.
“There is the potential that we will now decrease services to victims of crimes as a result,” Mahoney says.
He’s not alone. Law enforcement officials and judges across the state are lining up against the prospect of letting for-profit companies do the work now reserved for sworn officers. Jefferson County Circuit Judge Randy Koschnick, chief judge of the 3rd Judicial Administrative District, told the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel that all 10 of the state’s chief circuit judges oppose the plan.
The Journal Sentinel also reported that Milwaukee County’s chief judge says all 47 Milwaukee County judges are against the plan.
“We’re opposed to bail bondsmen in principle, primarily because there’s not a problem that the bail bondsman law would address,” Koschnick told the paper.
And he’s not one of those activist judges Republicans complain about. He ran as a conservative in 2009 against state Supreme Court Chief Justice Shirley Abrahamson.
“I can tell you that it’s vehemently being resisted in the four counties by the clerks of court, certainly by Dane County’s clerk of court, and I don’t think it’s being viewed favorably by the judiciary,” Mahoney says.
After nearly universal opposition from the criminal justice system, Gov. Scott Walker vetoed a similar proposal inserted into the budget in 2011. His office isn’t saying what he’ll do this time around.
In favor of the provision is the American Bail Coalition, a prominent member of the American Legislative Exchange Council, which has provided several model bills boosting the bail bond industry. In a 2010 newsletter, ABC bragged about its influence in ALEC.
The newsletter also claimed, “Private bail has done an excellent job of insuring that defendants get to court, and they do it at no cost to the taxpayer. It’s a system that has a long history of success.”
Well, not always. The Dallas Morning News reported that the bail bond industry soaked Texas taxpayers for millions by inflating the cost of properties it used as bond collateral. And USA Today reported that bail bondsmen from coast to coast have cost local governments tens of millions in bad bonds by exploiting lax oversight on high-risk defendants.
Not to mention the reported cases of corruption among bail bond agents, police, attorneys and judges.
Wisconsin banned bail bondsmen after allegations that some judges were setting cash bail instead of letting low-level defendants out on signature bonds so bail bond companies could profit, and that some judges waived bail on defendants after cases were settled so bondsmen could pocket the forfeiture.
Mahoney says he sees nothing redeeming about the plan.
“I just think it’s bad public policy,” he says. “Why would lawmakers in the state of Wisconsin embrace something that has already been shown to be bad policy?”
Copyright 2013 Madison Newspapers, Inc.